[Leica] Re: M9

[henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)]

>On Aug 31, 2007, at 6:20 PM, Henning wrote:
>
>>  Gee, will there ever be a Nikon D4? Might there possibly be a Canon
>>  50D? What a stretch for someone in those companys to admit to
>>  something like that. And of course, since there will be a D4, there's
>>  absolutely no point in buying a D3 when it becomes available in
>>  December.
>>
>>
>>  Maybe there'll be a Toyota Camry in 2012 that will be better than the
>>  current one. Maybe if a Toyota spokesman admitted as much sales of
>>  the current model might drop to zero.
>
>Henning,
>
>You are probably too young to remember the history of the Osborne 1 
>portable computer.  The 1981 Osborne was the first "laptop" 
>computer. It was about the size of a portable typewriter, weighed 20 
>pounds, with a screen the size of a playing card, and a handle to 
>carry it around. But, if you remembered to bring your battery pack 
>with you, it was the first computer you could use without plugging 
>in. It sold like hotcakes. Businessmen bought Osbornes because they 
>could take them home or to a hotel room. It was an excellent 
>computer, on a par with the best contemporary desktop computers. 
>But, there were a lot of complaints. Too heavy, too big, unreliable, 
>the screen was too small to read easily, the screen aspect ratio was 
>wrong, etc. Osborne thought he could quiet the complaints by 
>announcing that the soon to be introduced Osborne 2 would be 
>smaller, lighter, have a bigger screen, and would be better in every 
>way. Sales of the Osborne 1 stopped immediately. Who would spend big 
>bucks, $2000 in 1981 - about equivalent to $5000 today, for a 
>computer that would be obsolete in a very short time. For most 
>people a computer is not an absolute necessity. The purchase can be 
>deferred if a better option will be available soon. Osborne 
>Computer, a company about the size of Leica, couldn't handle the dry 
>up of cash flow and went under. The company stayed afloat for a few 
>years as a publisher of computer oriented technical books but made 
>no more computers.
>


The Osborne was a classic case of misguided pre-announcement. The 
fact that Leica might, if it survives, sometime produce an M9 after 
an M3, 2, 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 hardly seems like deduction that 
requires deep thought. Strangely enough, you or I might also have 
surmised that there is an M9 in the works.

And it's been many, many years that anyone has called me too young 
for anything....


>Most of today's high tech companies hold news of future product 
>introductions top secret. Apple even sues rumor mongers and has won 
>injunctions against web sites and bloggers who claim to have advance 
>news. It learned the Osborne lesson well. Auto companies do give 
>advanced information about upcoming models but they simultaneously 
>offer dramatic price reductions on older models to clear showrooms 
>of stock before the new cars arrive. Sure there will be a better 
>Toyota in 2012 but you will have to wait five years to get it. If 
>you need transportation, either drive your old car, buy a new car 
>and trade it in for a 2012 Toyota, or take a lot of cabs.
>
>The Leica analogy is similar, but not identical, to the Osborne 
>case. We have a small company producing a specialized camera for a 
>limited market. According to the reports of actual users, the M8 has 
>unsurpassed image quality but fails to fully satisfy the original 
>expectations of the Leica faithful. It is a bit too large, a bit 
>unreliable, doesn't have a full frame sensor, requires filters on 
>lenses, needs lens coding for best results, and simply sounds wrong. 
>Now suppose that a Leica spokesman makes a cryptic statement that 
>another Leica, say the M9, may or may not be in the works. But if it 
>is in the works it may (or may not) satisfy the demand for a full 
>frame sensor and have 20% more pixels to boot. What do you think 
>will happen to marginal sales of the original camera? Sure, Leica 
>using professionals may still buy the M8. They will probably get 
>full use out of the camera and can amotize their investment over 
>thousands of pictures. But the average Leica using photographer, 
>semi pro or advanced amateur, could easily wait a few months for the 
>new model. The M8 has been on the market for about a year. In the 
>electronics industry a change is about due. Remember Leica does not 
>make most of the camera's electronic bits. They buy them from 
>outside suppliers. The photoelectronic industry moves at a rapid 
>rate and Leica's technology may be yesterday's news. In all 
>liklihood a M9 is indeed in the works and the Leica spokesman may 
>have been floating a trial balloon. A "new and better" M9 might free 
>Leica of the M8 albatross.
>I just hope the announcement doesn't kill the company. Leica made a 
>profit last year roughly equivalent to that of a medium sized pub. 
>They need that cash to keep coming. Oh well, they can always license 
>the name to Panasonic and concentrate on 4/3s cameras.
>
>And Henning, I never implied the M8 early adopters were misguided 
>zealots. I admire the hope and courage of all of you. And frankly I 
>also admire the images you have posted on the LUG. But most Luggers 
>who bought the M8 were already superb photographers. In the hands of 
>a duffer like myself it may be worth giving up a little image 
>quality for ease of use and convenience as well as the ability to 
>get full frame images from my existing lenses. That way I don't have 
>to buy new optics to shoot wide angle photos. Hell, even the 
>familiar Leica M body shape isn't important. I really love my CL. 
>Now if the hypothetical M9 were a full frame camera the size of the 
>CL (but with a longer rangefinder base) I would buy it in an instant.

I too would like to have an M digital that was full frame and took 
all my lenses, that handled like an M4, that cost $500, produced 25Mp 
noise free 12,000ISO images and could constantly be updated to the 
newest standards through a free download. Not too likely. 1.3 factor 
from 10Mp at $4200 is achievable today, and that's what we have. Get 
it or forget it. No matter.

The M8 is here and it works. It doesn't replace my Canon 5D, 4x5, 
Roundshot or other specific cameras, but that's fine, because I have 
them to do the things the M8 can't. If you don't want or can't make 
reasonable use of or otherwise feel that the M8 doesn't do what it 
should for the money, there's an obvious solution. It's just that 
your questions and requests for proof have been sounding more and 
more unreasonable, when people such as Tina have really given you all 
the info you need, other than trying the camera for yourself. If you 
can afford it and think it may do something useful for you, try it 
and/or buy it. If not, Leica's fate doesn't hang on your purchase. 
The M8 is available, and it's the best digital rangefinder out there, 
and the closest to a film M. That's good enough for the present, 
although obviously perfection will have to wait a while.

And yes, Larry, you have implied that early adopters were misguided 
zealots and Leica apologists.


>Leica - are you ready to take my order? And have a Happy LABOUR Day!
>
>Larry Z

-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com